A few things:

First, nobody is right or wrong on this matter and nobody ever will be. Everyone is welcome to their opinion and in a perfect world, this sub would be a place of discussion and debate. I can't even stay in that 'mode' all of the time, but my frustration only boils over when people fail to use reasonable logic, not because they simply disagree. I assume since you posted this, that you want, or at least welcome, to opposing views and thoughts.

Second, if you are comfortable with your conclusion, great. I have found that even though I have come to my 'conclusion', I find that it is only right to search out and continue to find as much information as i can to be certain that my conclusion still feels 'right'. One of the hardest things to do in any debate, or situation like this, is to keep an open mind while interpreting new info, and to accept as much new info as you possibly can. I would wager a years salary that the percentage of people who think Adnan is innocent is higher with those who only listened to the podcast than those that have read the transcripts and engaged in thoughtful debate on this sub, simply because of the amount of information and way it was presented by SK. Coming to a 'conclusion' is fine, but doing so with less than all available information is akin to rating a book and writing a review after only reading every other chapter.

Third, it seems as though we have different methods when evaluating information. There is nothing wrong with this as every person has their own way of processing information and applying logic. It seems as though your approach to either/or situations is with the idea that unless there is solid proof, you default to a benefit of the doubt decision. On the other hand, I approach these 'decisions' with the simple question of which makes the most sense. I know that I can never know the truth, so the only thing I can do is apply reasoning and probability. It really is the closest to a scientific approach that you can take. This case is interesting because so many of those either/or decisions are connected, so once you decide what you believe regarding one, it will affect your thought process on the next. I also do not put much weight into peoples 'actions' or 'reactions' to things. Those are simply clutter when attempting to be pragmatic. There are plenty of people who will argue that my method is inherently flawed. Maybe, maybe not.

Finally, I have concluded (although I do not like to use that word because it makes it sound like my decision is final) that Adnan is guilty. When applying the 'what makes the most sense' and probability factor to almost every question in this case, it points to Adnan's involvement. Possibly not Adnan with his hands around Hae's neck, but in terms of creating a scenario in which he is completely innocent, it creates a string of factors in which you have to accept the less likely choice. I don't want to list each one of those, if you want to debate them we can. I will simply touch upon your statement that the cell phone data is "hokey". I suggest that you do research and educate yourself on what the data exactly means. I have. I don't want to sound preachy here, but that information is so important if your goal is to find the truth, that simply writing it off as "hokey" is irresponsible and disingenuous to your stated goal. Do not take Susan Simpsons claims as fact, do not take mine as fact, just make an attempt to understand it better because it is really important, and not completely useless. If you want to debate that, I am more than welcome to supply the opposing view.